Are you having fun yet? Or are you poor?

Pardon my blunt title, but it's functional. The question assumes that if you aren't having fun, you're poor.

And that's exactly what Bronwyn T. Williams (a Scandinavian Elf, I'm assuming) asserts.

The function of basic level composition classes is to teach students the compositions skills needed for success. Pleasure in the classroom is not a concern of the professor - Bronwyn (I'm sticking to the first name because it's more fun and memorable) has in the past studied the disassociation between pedagogy and fun.

In many universities students who display proficiency can test out of this required composition class, and are free to move on to more stimulating classes that allow for creativity and pleasure. Guess who is most likely to test out?

Yup, the rich kids. Students who are from a higher income family typically display better composition skills.

Likewise, Honors and Creative Writing classes are typically filled with higher income students. These classes are more focused on creativity and seminar-style discussion, welcoming the pleasure of the texts into the classroom.

But in composition, we focus on the skills necessary to achieve success. This isn't bad itself - this itself helps low-income students obtain the skills they need to climb the socioeconomic ladder and better provide for themselves in the future.

But why is it only the Honors and Creative Writing classes that welcome creativity and pleasure? Why not the basic composition courses?

Bronwyn stresses that composition instructors have a responsibility to bring 'fun' into the classroom. To better bridge the gap between low-income and high-income students by welcoming creativity to students in all classes.

How? Bronwyn notes three things inherent to a pleasurable activity: competence, control, and challenge (Hey, look! Alliteration!) These three things are inherently linked to experience.

At one point, Bronwyn thinks from a students point of view: imagine a task with which you have no real experience. If it isn't writing (it's not, you're an English student, so think of something else), then perhaps car mechanics, or painting, or something of the sort. How would you feel about engaging in a critical study of the task which included a grading of your performance?

Bronwyn suggests that we bring in texts that are familiar to students in order to allow their experience to play a role. He predominately suggests television and movies: 96% of American families own a television. Only half (brace yourself) of American families purchased A book last year. Half. And that half was predominately the upper class families.

If we are to bridge the gap and allow everyone to have fun (not just rich kids) then we must look at other texts.

Movies (The Big Lebowski, anyone?). Or even crazier: perhaps allow the students to consider their own text.

What if a student studied the rhetoric of a car manual? What would be wrong with that? If he/she is interested in car mechanics and they study a mechanic text, how will this not help their writing? Especially if they are going into car mechanics, but even if they don't - they have engaged with a text and, because they are in control, competent, and yet challenged, they have a higher likelihood of finding the activity pleasurable.

Hopefully this was fun to read. If not, go do something you have fun, and then talk about it.

jds

PS - Here's the citation.

Williams, Bronwyn T. Are we having fun yet? Students, social class, and the pleasures of literacy. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy Vol 48: 4, 2004. Web.